On Trump: Aid, Discomfort and Treason?

In “Stop Throwing the Word Treason Around” (Op-Ed, Aug. 9), Christopher Buskirk suggests that Democrats, in applying the word “treason” to Donald Trump’s actions, “are willing to pull down our institutions and tear apart the social and political fabric that holds us together.”

Perhaps he has forgotten that President Trump himself has played fast and loose with the term. In Blue Ash, Ohio, on Feb. 5, for instance, Mr. Trump said Democratic lawmakers who failed to applaud his State of the Union address “were like death. And un-American. Un-American. Somebody said, ‘treasonous.’ I mean, yeah, I guess, why not? Can we call that treason? Why not! I mean they certainly didn’t seem to love our country very much.”

The Constitution states, “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” The framers carefully worded this definition, to prevent accusations of treason as a means of stifling political dissent. It does seem clear that this is the definition that would apply to the president, or any other American. As far as Mr. Trump is concerned, the question then becomes: Are the Russians our enemies, and has the president given them aid and comfort?

I agree that we bandy about the word “treason,” and a great many other insulting terms, too readily in our current political discourse. It is time for us all to take a step back from heated rhetoric and look at the facts.

Kim JohnsonStamford, Conn.

To the Editor:

Christopher Buskirk begins by accusing Democratic politicians of “inflammatory rhetoric,” then declares that uttering the word “treason” in connection with President Trump is setting us on a dangerous path “that could lead to a crisis of political legitimacy.” Indeed, we are on that path, and there is at this moment a crisis of political legitimacy, but it emanates from the words and actions of Mr. Trump, not from congressional Democrats.

He talks about Democrats’ “paranoid style” and “bully-boy tactics,” and says that this is the problem. But the real problem is Mr. Trump’s odd affinity for and connections to Russians — that he could stand next to Russia’s leader and say publicly he believes that person and not the entire American intelligence community. We seem to have a president who is overtly working with a hostile power, against the United States — what would you call that?

I think “treason” is a good word for it.

Elizabeth DiPalmaGhent, N.Y.

To the Editor:

The Democrats are trying to delegitimize the election? Really? What about the years Donald Trump spent insisting that the first black president simply had to have been born in Africa? Or his constant campaign complaint that if he lost the election, that would mean it was rigged? Or the chants about locking up his opponent?

Or . . .

Alan RobbinsNew York

To the Editor:

Christopher Buskirk asserts that the election of Donald Trump was “free, fair and open,” despite the growing mountain of evidence that something was, and still is, seriously amiss.

By any reasonable measure, Mr. Trump’s fervent dismantling of government, his demonstrated contempt for the work of his predecessors and his penchant for cozying up to dictators suggest potentially dark purpose. Alarm bells are going off, and well they should.

Michael HendrixFallbrook, Calif.

To the Editor:

I promise that I will stop throwing the word “treason” around when President Trump stops lying.

Harold J. SmithWhite Plains

A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 26 of the New York edition with the headline: On Trump: Aid, Discomfort and Treason?. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe